J.C. Gupta, J. - (1.) Heard petitioner's counsel.
(2.) This is tenant's writ petition directed against the order dated 18.4.98 passed by the Prescribed Authority rejecting the petitioner's prayer for summoning witnesses for cross-examination. Against this order the petitioner preferred an appeal before respondent No. 2 which was not maintainable and has been dismissed as such.
(3.) Apart from the fact that this writ petition has been filed with a great delay whereby the order made in the month of April. 1998 is being challenged, it is further to be found that the order impugned has been made at an interlocutory stage of the proceedings. While rejecting the said application, the Prescribed Authority has observed that he did not think it necessary to summon the witnesses for cross-examination. It is well settled that proceedings under Section 21 (1) (a) are of a summary nature and for that reason, it has been specifically provided by Section 34 (1) (b) that evidence in such cases is receivable on affidavits. It is only where the Prescribed Authority finds that in the absence of cross-examination of the persons who have filed affidavits a just decision cannot be arrived at, it may permit cross-examination. However, such a prayer cannot be claimed as a right of by any of the parties. In the present case, no satisfactory reasons were disclosed in the application as to why the cross-examination of the witnesses was necessary for just and proper decision of the case. In any view of the matter, if any prejudice is shown to have been caused to the petitioner on account of refusal of his prayer for cross-examination of witnesses, the matter can be carried over to superior court, if and when occasion for the same so arises.;